Explore the vast range of titles available.

The last two decades have been marked by devastating global challenges that threaten the international problem-solving activities of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), which have guided global interactions for decades. They offer collective actions by member countries, but come with pressures to create and sustain integrative IGO policies implemented by all members. If these globally focused IGO policies (supranational institutions) misalign with related country-focused national policies (national institutions), an institutional schism exists. We study different levels of institutional schisms and their impact on member countries and national/international business environments .  Building on institutional theory/new institutional economics and insights from political science, we conceptualize the different levels of schisms based on the strength of a member country’s national institutions and the degree of compliance with IGO-specific national and supranational institutions. The developed concept allows identifying the impact of IGOs on countries and the global business environment, which is critical for policymakers and practitioners alike.

We theorize that foreign multinationals wield a particularly significant competitive weapon in host markets: as outsiders, they can pinpoint social schisms in host labor markets and exploit them for competitive advantage. Using two data sets from South Korea, we show that multinationals improve profitability and productivity by aggressively hiring an excluded group, women, in the local managerial labor market. We predict and find that foreign multinationals in South Korea are in a unique position to identify social schisms, implement practices designed to support and enhance the hiring and promotion of female managers, hire and promote members of the socially excluded group to positions of managerial leadership, and enjoy a net profitability benefit from doing so despite the real risk of backlash from some regulators, customers, suppliers, and employees from the socially dominant group in society. Many multinationals, even those whose home markets discriminate against women, appear to have recognized the strategic opportunity of what we call the outsider’s network advantage. The gradualness of the host market’s shift toward a new equilibrium freer of discrimination presented multinationals a multiyear competitive opportunity for outsider’s advantage. Our study extends understanding of the multinational enterprise by showing how its competitive opportunities include identifying and exploiting social schisms in a host country’s labor market.

Racism, sexism, and ageism persist in modern day organizations and may translate into workplace discrimination, which can undermine organizational effectiveness. We provide the first meta-analysis comparing the relationships between these three types of prejudice (racism, sexism, and ageism) and three types of workplace discrimination (selection, performance evaluation, and opposition to diversity-supportive policies). Across outcomes, racism was associated with workplace discrimination, whereas sexism was not. Ageism was associated with discriminatory selection and opposition to organizational policies supporting older workers; however, ageism was not related to discriminatory performance evaluation. Consistent with prior research and theory, Implicit Association Test measures were related to subtle discrimination (opposition to diversity-supportive policies) but not deliberate discrimination (selection and performance evaluation). Finally, prejudice was more strongly associated with discrimination against real as compared with hypothetical targets. Implications for organizational researchers and practitioners are discussed.

The varied career of the Medideval Cardinal Adam Easton (c.1330--1397) led him from Norwich Cathedral Priory to Oxford, Avignon and Rome. This volume presents recent research on Easton's oeuvre, his diplomacy and the books that accompanied him on his travels.

The ‘sharing economy’ has become a new buzzword in urban life as digital technology companies set up online platforms to link together people and un- or underutilised assets with those seeking to rent them for short periods of time. While cloaked under the rhetoric of ‘sharing’, the exchanges they foster are usually profit-driven. These economic activities are having profound impacts on urban environments as they disrupt traditional forms of hospitality, transport, service industry and housing. While critical debates have focused on the challenges that sharing economy activities bring to existing labour and economic practices, it is necessary to acknowledge that they also have increasingly significant impacts on planning policy and urban governance. Using the case of Airbnb in London, this article looks at how these sharing or platform economy companies are involved in encouraging governments to change existing regulations, in this case by deregulating short-term letting. This has important implications for planning enforcement. We examine how the challenges around obtaining data to enforce new regulations are being addressed by local councils who struggle to balance corporate interests with public good. Finally, we address proposals for using algorithms and big data as means of urban governance and argue that the schism between regulation and enforcement is opening up new digitally mediated spaces of informal practices in cities. 数字技术公司建立了在线平台，将人员和未利用或未充分利用的资产与希望短期出租的业主联系起来。在这一方式下， “共享经济” 己经成为城市生活中的新口号。但是，虽然有 “共享” 的修辞，这些方式培养的交流通常是由利润驱动的。这些经济活动破坏了传统的酒店、交通、服务业和住房形式，对城市环境产生了深远的影响。虽然关键的辩论集中在共享经济活动给现有劳动和经济实践带来的挑战上，但有必要承认它们对规划政策和城市治理也有越来越大的影响。本文以 Airbnb 在伦敦的运行情况为案例，探讨这些共享或平台经济公司如何参与鼓励政府改变现有的法规，在伦敦的具体案例中是放松对短租的限制。这对规划的执行具有重要意义。我们研宄了地方议会如何通过努力平衡公司利益和公共利益来克服获得数据以执行新法规的挑战。最后，我们提出使用算法和大数据作为城市治理手段的建议，认为监管与执法之间的分裂正在开辟城市非正式实践的新型数字媒介空间。

The concept of disaster resilience has gained attention in political spheres and news outlets over the past few years, yet relatively few empirical measures of the concept exist. Furthermore, research into urban resilience has dwarfed our understanding of disaster resilience in rural places. This schism in what is known about the differences between urban and rural places becomes the topic of this article. Employing a suite of spatial and statistical techniques using an established measure of community resilience, the Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities (BRIC), we focus on two key questions to better explain the resilience divide between urban and rural areas of the United States. Nonparametric rank analysis, analysis of variance, and logistic regression help describe the relationships between rurality and disaster resilience in contrast to resilience in urban areas. Pinpointing the driving factors, or characteristics, of resilience in rural America compared to metropolitan America, accomplished through binary logistic regression, revealed notable distinctions. Resilience in urban areas is primarily driven by economic capital, whereas community capital is the most important driver of disaster resilience in rural areas. Within rural areas there is considerable spatial variability in the components of disaster resilience. This suggests that attempts to enhance resilience cannot be approached using a one-size-fits-most strategy given the variability in the primary drivers of disaster resilience at county scales.

This paper discusses historical dynamics in the Russian Eastern Orthodox Church, in particular among the groups known as Old Believers. Seeing itself as the only true continuation of ancient Christianity, Eastern Orthodoxy has been more concerned with continuity and institutional authority than with conversion into the faith, and therefore schism was regarded as a matter of utmost significance. The Great Schism of 1666 split the reforming central religious authorities from the plethora of Old Believers, so-called because they remained faithful to the truth of the old ways. Over later centuries the excommunicated Old Believers would themselves scatter and splinter repeatedly, in each case erecting boundaries around a newly defined (yet seen as ancient) righteous way of life, while also protecting it from the state law and external authority. In this paper I suggest that these schismatic decisions to adopt the stance of messianic 'rightness,' and the willingness of martyrs to struggle for it, can be related to the moral-social basis of the Russian Revolution, especially if revolution is understood not simply as a political event but also as the forging of new and 'true' meaning, accompanied by the rejection of wrongful thinkers. Adapted from the source document. Reprinted by permission of the University of Chicago Press. © All rights reserved

Received wisdom suggests that multipartner alliances are relatively unstable because of their complexity and the increased potential for free riding. Nonetheless, multipartner alliances do benefit from built-in stabilizing third-party ties that mitigate opportunism and conflict between partner pairs. Previous empirical research on multipartner alliance stability has been inconclusive. We shed some light on these inconsistencies by recognizing that within multipartner alliances, schisms can occur not only between a pair of partners but also between subgroups of partners that are divided by faultlines. We suggest that divisive faultlines can form between subgroups of partners within a multipartner alliance as a function of their prior experience with one another. When a subgroup of alliance partners has relatively strong ties to each other and weak ties to other partners, destabilizing factions can develop that hamper reciprocity among the partners. Using a longitudinal analysis of 59 multipartner alliances, we found that, in general, faultlines (as modeled by the dispersion of tie strength within multipartner alliances) increase the hazard of unplanned dissolutions. We also found that multipartner alliances comprising a mix of centrally and peripherally positioned partners within the industry network were less apt to suffer the effects of divisive faultlines. We suggest that this is due to the greater opportunity costs of dissolution and the presence of relatively high-status partners who can act as peacekeepers and coordinators of their lower-status partners.

This article reviews the development of the anthropology of Christianity and considers the new questions and approaches introduced by the articles in this special issue ofCurrent Anthropology. The article first addresses the contested history of the anthropology of Christianity, suggesting that there is intellectual value in seeing it as largely a development of the new century. It goes on to locate the rise of the anthropology of Christianity in relation to a number of important changes both in the place of religion in the world and in the academic study of religion that also occurred during this period. It then considers the foci of the articles collected here. These include such relatively novel topics as the nature of Christian social institutions, social processes, space-making practices, and constructions of gender, as well as questions concerning the boundaries of Christianity. Several articles also focus on considerations of recent developments in the study of long-standing topics in the anthropology of Christianity, such as discontinuity, reflexivity, experience, and materiality. Throughout the discussion of these issues, I take up critical debates around the anthropology of Christianity, for example, the charge that it is wholly idealist in orientation, and consider how these articles contribute to the further development of these discussions.

Orthodoxy says ground induces a strict partial order structure on reality, from the more derivative to the more fundamental. Heresy denies that ground is a strict partial order: ground is either not irreflexive (Jenkins 2011) or not transitive (Schaffer 2012). Here, Raven aims to defend Orthodoxy against Heresy. He first characterize Orthodoxy and then the Heresy against it. Next, he argues against the Heresy that ground is not irreflexive and then argued against the Heresy that ground is not transitive. His defense of Orthodoxy vindicates ground's Orthodox deployment \"in the wild\" and weakens Infidels's attempts to leverage the Schism into an argument for ground's incoherence.